Is the 2018 Massachusetts gubernatorial election a repeat of
1970 or 1974? Depends on which party you
ask.

Republicans see a repeat of 1970 while Democrats hope to
turn the election into 1974. In their
zeal, however, Democrats risk misreading the public mood by firing off trumped
up charges that couldn’t deliver Cushman’s bread, let alone victory (ask
Professor Mo).

Affable and politically astute, Sargent outflanked White at
every turn. Democrats entered the race
divided amongst themselves with some withholding support from White while
others backed the liberal Sargent.

The election results were a foregone conclusion.

Not so just four years later as the Democrat’s leading
reformer, Michael Dukakis, won the nomination, and was able to capitalize on a
turnaround in Sargent’s political fortunes.

No two elections are alike, and the politics of the state
have changed significantly since the early 1970s and the cast of characters are
also quite different.

Still, Republicans see in Governor Charlie Baker a repeat of
1970. Popular and happy to work with
Beacon Hill Democrats (to the chagrin of activists on both sides), Baker embodies
the spirit of the late Frank Sargent. It
will surprise no one if leading Democrats remain somewhat neutral in the 2018
election or shed their partisan attachment and endorse Baker. Indeed, as Professor Cunningham reminded me,
Sargent once noted that “I pissed off some Republicans, but there was no other
way to get anything done.”

Democrats hope for a repeat of 1974. But their desperation might get the better of
them.

Consider the political talking points of the past week.

Newton Mayor Setti Warren joined the conversation on
Amazon’s second headquarters by suggesting Worcester as a viable alternative to
Boston. Then before any pro-growth
message could be amplified, the Mayor and his team stepped on their messaging
by inventing a story that suggests Charlie Baker has been refusing to help the
people of Puerto Rico.

As White himself might have said upon hearing this baseless
charge, “Mawtha a'Gawd!"

According to Baker, his team is following the established protocols
of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). With NEMA, state-to-state assistance is
logged and coordinated through the Emergency Management Assistance Compact
(EMAC). Requests to EMAC for National Guard assets allows Governors to
strategically deploy troops.

The Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) works
with EMAC to handle the requests and coordination. MEMA's Director is Kurt Schwartz, appointed
by Democratic Governor Deval Patrick in 2010.

It is hard to imagine any circumstances where a Governor
would ignore protocols and deploy the National Guard without coordination. Indeed, any such scenario would create
logistical nightmares and add unnecessary stress on local officials, those on
the front lines of a disaster.

Warren’s team responded
by calling all of this “bureaucratic gobbledegook.” Later, they declared that Baker “deferred to
Trump,” which we might politely call a falsehood.

The White House's response to the suffering in Puerto Rico
is contemptible and Warren's team seems to believe that tying Baker to Trump and
the unfolding humanitarian disaster will benefit them politically.

Given the nature of the accusation, some, like NECN host Sue
O’Connell pushed back. As if on cue,
Warren’s campaign called her “lazy”
and again faulted journalists for not doing their job, as defined by the Warren
campaign.

It’s a flashback to earlier in the summer when Team Warren,
seemingly angry at the press coverage of the Governor, tweeted
that WGBH host Jim Braude was soft on Baker because “rich guys look out for
each other.”

If there is a strategy behind all of this, it is the overt
attempt to turn Baker into the Frank Sargent of 1974 instead of what voters
seem to see: the Sargent of 1970.

But when your leading candidate’s team is attacking the
press, complaining about coverage, and making up an incendiary charge, the
political terrain isn’t working for them.

Unless Baker has refused the assistance that Puerto Rico has
requested via NEMA & EMAC, this charge is without merit.

When journalist Salena Zito visited
Harvard recently, she noted “I couldn’t find anyone who didn’t approve of
their Republican Gov. Charlie Baker. From the leafy halls of Harvard to locals
grabbing lunch at Charlie’s Kitchen on Eliot Street, everyone I talked to was a
Democrat — and everyone gave him high marks as the state’s manager.”

The visiting Yinzer nailed it.

What voters typically want in the Governor’s office is a
manager. The largely suburban
professionals who support the managerial class value rationality and
efficiency. Edgar Litt wrote about this subculture
of Massachusetts back in 1965. They are socially
tolerant and supportive of measures to reduce inequality but carefully watch
how their tax dollars are used. Given
the many managerial challenges left by the last administration on Beacon Hill
and the ongoing crises of governance in DC, a staid manager in the Corner
Office seems to fit the moment.